Leaderboard

I have posted a thread asking the question a while ago "which country is best?" It was meant to be a completely open question, and I received a lot of replies. Most emphasised the importance of NO GVERNMENT as a prerequisite for a moral society. So I have been doing some research and reading Practical Anarchy and Everyday Anarchy to broaden my horizons. Here are the countries I have narrowed down my search to, and would like to get a few opinions on which is truly the closest candidate. Here are the largely undisputed data. Please add a few criteria if there are any. There seems to be 5 main requirements for an ancap paradise: (I deliberately used data only from wikipedia, as they have the lowest possibility of being controversial) 0. No government. Everyone fails this one, so I won't include it. 1. Freedom of education. This is pretty hard to quantify so I only gave them general rankings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_education 2. Economic freedom. This is probably the most important one. Sadly, there is only quite unreliable data out there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_economic_freedom 3. Absolutist ideology. Sorry, so far any form of atheism is not one. Only contemporary powerful ideologies count. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Importance_of_religion_by_country 4. Moral population. Respect for the NAP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index 5. Strong Population. Not gross strength, but strength per capita in the given geopolitical predicament . What good is a society if they can't defend themselves, amaright? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Global_Militarization_Index

I complied a little list of FDR terms, mostly for fun, but also for the newbies out there. Please add more! Aesthetics - A branch of philosophy which examines beauty and good taste. When applying aesthetics to behavior, it is outside the realm of morality. For example, it is aesthetically preferable to be prompt, but it is not immoral to be late. Aesthetics helps evaluate certain behaviors which are better than others, but not necessarily right or wrong. Being late isn’t evil, but it is preferable to be on time. Armadillo Rollover Defense - Play dead! A defense tactic used to avoid criticism and, in more extreme cases, reality itself. It is a form of denial where the party in question plays dumb. Example: "Mom, I feel upset about certain things that happened in my childhood." Mom sticks fingers in her ears and starts singing, "Lalalalala." Asshole Proximity Disorder - A state of dissociation or depression that manifests only when you are around certain people, namely assholes. This negative emotional response is not dysfunctional, it is an appropriate reaction to being around corrupt people. Blarp - To vent or unload a lot of negative emotions on another person, which temporarily transfers the emotional pain to the other person (see Poison Container). The blarp is distinctive for how unproductive it is. There will be relief in the moment, a catharsis of sorts, but none of the underlying problems have been resolved. Blut - A Beauty Slut. Someone who seeks beauty in a romantic relationship in order to increase status. Someone who values beauty over virtues. BNAP - Bullshit Non-Apology. An "apology" that doesn't imply any personal guilt or responsibility. Example: “I’m sorry I yelled, but you upset me.” Translation: “My bad behavior is your fault.” Often there will be a covert insult embedded in the BNAP. Fog - A form of dishonesty that occurs when there is a disconnection with the self. It is a defense mechanism in which your mind has protected itself from painful memories or feelings, so when those things come up your mind goes blank. It is often marked by confusion, evasion, and non-direct answers like “I don’t know.” More info here. Poison Container - Abusive behavior which repeatedly uses someone as a dumping ground for unprocessed psychological pain. Psychological pain is transferrable; it can be lessened, temporarily, by unloading on another person. The most vile form of this is from a parent to a child. A child does not have developed internal boundaries yet, so this kind of violation affects children more than it would adults. Further, a child is trapped, he or she is involuntarily in the situation and cannot get away. It is seriously sick. UPB - Universally Preferable Behavior. To UPB someone is to point out double standard or hypocrisy that they are employing. As in, "Oh, your mom wants to tell you that you are being inconsiderate by not coming to Sunday dinner? UPB her ass! She is being inconsiderate by not caring about the fact that you don't want to come to Sunday dinner." Read the book! RTR - Real-Time Relationship. A relationship in which there is freedom to be completely honest in the moment about one’s thoughts and feelings. See the brilliant, life changing book here. Virtue - A quality considered morally good or desirable in a person. Examples: honesty, integrity, courage, strength, empathy, etc. Zinger - A remark which is abrasive or stinging, but not intentionally so. While comment wasn’t meant to hurt the person it was directed to, it was still painful and needs to be corrected. This typically occurs because of collateral damage from an unprocessed childhood. Once one has awareness of this though, it is preventable with introspection, processing, and personal responsibility.

I'm enjoying the mental gymnastics people are going through to justify murdering a human that had no say in the matter. An unborn human is still a human. Humans cannot give birth to none humans. So we know for sure that an unborn human is still human. But that human is inconvenient to irresponsible ass hat "parents" so they will deny their child's humanity so they dont have to feel bad about killing said child. Perhaps its better the child be spared having such horrid parents.

which brings me to my next idea, ejaculation-based hosting. i think stef would do quite well.

How do other video sites work and make enough money? Vimeo or even pornhub? Somehow they run tons of video. Hmmmmm.

just gimme the damn youtube alternative already

Letting kids get angry at parents or voice their opinions are also good ways for them to stand up to others, even to authority figures. After all, being in charge doesn't mean you're always right. When I was a kid, when I got angry with my mother, I was punished for my "bad attitude." As a result, it made me vulnerable to bullies because I didn't want to appear "mean," which got me scolded for not standing up for myself. Talk about a mixed message. You can't punish a child for showing anger or disagreeing with you, and then wonder why they struggle with standing up for themselves. Now, it's a bit easier because I'm grown up, so no one can punish me for being "bad" anymore. I even stood up to my family, the ultimate bullies, by cutting them out. I continue to learn ways to defend myself, especially against those who think just because I'm quiet and keep to myself a lot, that I need some kind of "help."

I had an experience the other day that was similar in nature, but not severity, to what you described. I was angry at the surface, but I was also experiencing hurt, sorrow, and fear underneath that anger. I knew that with my anger, I had to really try to explore and understand it. So, I journaled as much as I could to connect with my emotions. I leaned into the anger. I listened to what my anger was trying to tell me. That what this person had done was wrong, and also that I felt hurt. I knew that due to the intensity of my anger given the small sleight, something was amplifying my emotions. I tried to think back to when something similar happened to me as a child, because I think that I still carried that historical hurt. So, I explored that historical memory and resolved it, and the level of hurt and anger that I was experiencing dissolved. I could see things more objectively, and while I was still hurt and angry, it was much less so, a more manageable, appropriate, accurate, and fitting level. Now, I'm kind of glad that I had the experience, because I am less vulnerable to attack and I was able to provide for more of my psychological needs. I second what Shirgall said, and imaging the person as putting on a performance is not imagery that I have ever heard of before, but I quite like. I would say probably about 100% of the time (I really wanna say 99% to hedge) that when someone does this, it's never personal. It's always about them. In a way, it would be nice if it was personal, because that means that they care about us, although in a negative direction. I also agree that this senior is probably dumping their excess, uncomfortable emotions onto you, further adding to the fact that it is not personal. It's not fair, and you don't deserve it, but understanding what the other person is doing does help.

Yeah, this might be more suited for peaceful parenting, but eh, whatever. Teens do go through an individuation process. They distance themselves from their primary family members, make greater associations with peers and people near to their age, they experiment, and they show a greater desire to be independent and not be aided by the parents. So, no matter how good or bad of a parent you are, you can expect this. That these baby birds are going to start trying to fly out of the nest and hunt worms for themselves. This experimentation might involve drugs, alcohol, etc. even with good parenting. There are no teens that I know of that I would consider to have really good parenting, so a lot of this is speculation and also based on developmental theories. Rebellion in my mind has to do with acting out and being angry. There is resentment in rebellion. That, fuck you, you don't know what you're talking about. I think rebellion occurs as the teens come to realize how they have been mistreated and taken advantage of by parenting engaging in poor parenting practices. I think that good parenting can help mitigate rebellion, by allowing the child to be angry at the parents, validating the emotion, and earnestly listening to what the child has to share. Individuation cannot be avoided, and is a great and wonderful thing. It is the transition into full person- and adulthood.

YAD Principle - Short for "You're A Dick", the YAD principle is a method of cutting through grey areas in ethics. Is it immoral to buy up all the land around a village, build a moat and charge the villagers to cross? (It is his property, after all). We don't need to go into all of the many considerations that could be made because the YAD principle makes short work of this ethical conundrum: the moat guy is a dick.

You are obviously being defensive. Where did I say anything was wrong? If you look at my post, I actually advocate for just that; "They should be fighting for something realistic and attainable like getting chickens and cows out of factory farms and into the fields where they belong." Now that I can get behind, but that is not what vegans do is it? Sorry, but everything alive is food. Everything. All living beings will die and be eaten, by bacteria or by predators. Suffering is suffering, dying is not suffering. Dying is dying. All things die, all things suffer, but dying is not suffering. When an animal is eaten, suffering is not inherent. So, which is more harmful? Neither, because what is "harm" in this question? Some ethereal "harm"? Killing animals to eat them is not "harm" it is survival, it is ecology, it is biology. Do you think that animals will live forever if we don't eat them? Do you think that animals reflect back on "what could have been" when led to slaughter, all the wile lamenting and reflecting on all the lost possibilities of their untimely ending? Would a cow advocate for your well-being? Are chickens going to send nukes to asteroids in a collision path with earth? Did fish end slavery, cure any diseases or do anything other than wait there to sustain the lives of other creatures, ever? When you are done with human omnivores, is your plan to move on to animal omnivores, then get around to carnivores, then move the moon and stars around in the sky? Anthropomorphising anything can lead to much confusion. If you think that cows and chickens are having a human experience, then the vegan argument makes sense. But since they do not, then the vegan argument just becomes an exercise in anthropomorphising animals to total confusion and to no fruitful end...

It's a bit silly to talk about animal abuse and compare how free they are in the wild, when anyone who spends 5 minutes in the wild knows you are surrounded by suffering and animals fighting to the death for survival. Which reminds me of this: http://youtu.be/3C8FDDs-iQs?t=44s Call it speciesism, but in no way I think the life of other animals are worth more than humans, and if people need to eat to survive, they should eat animals, unless vegetarians actually come up with a solution for world wide hunger, instead of raising their flags with their rich friends who can stuff their faces with as much tufu they want, it will sound like empty rethoric to me.

My argument is this: In the society we live in, it is completely unnecessary to consume animal products in order to live a healthy life. *(see below) it is therefore unnecessary to fund the exploitation, torture and killing of animals. Funding the exploitation, torture and killing of animals is something one chooses to do based solely on one's taste for animal flesh, secretions and skin. *This has been proved time and time again by independent nutritionalists. The British National Health Service also agrees. http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Vegetarianhealth/Pages/Vegandiets.aspx